Mcleod Has Died.

[dalsingh101]

dalsingh101

You have posted generalizations so far. can you post concrete quotes form his works so that we can discuss

those specifically.

here is another singh asking for the same from you in the same thread.

Basically, you can't be bothered to go and find the dozens of articles by Sikhs who expose McLeod can you? Try using a search engine, I know you are good at this.

As for:

That is what is required from a scholar of your calibre.

Don't be condescending.

[singh2]

As far I as I am aware the only thing he done of this nature is to publish the Chaupa Singh rahitnama from the library that was sacked. This manuscript was one that was lost so what is in his published work is all that survives of it. Apparently he made a copy of the work in that publication. This was a rahit written by Brahmin which he thought was the earliest extant example (mid 1700s). Recently Jeevan Deol discovered a smaller rahit that was much earlier (early 1700s)

That is not the only one. he found tankahnama of Bhai nand lal ji also dating to 1718 in the library. These manuscripts are still avaliable.

Jeevan Deol only and only quotes Mcleod on rehatnamas. Please do not fabricated admin cut and bull stories. If you have his new finding done by Jeevan Deol please share with us.

It is completely unbecoming of a sikh to call Chaupa singh a Brahmin. Chaupa singh's rehatnama was the major document in rehatnamas.

He also met martyrdom in sikh struggle of that era. Do not you know that? From where you read your history?

If you know something I do not about this digitising of manuscripts, please share. Because I have not heard of this wholesale digitising of manuscripts of the library. Please share where you learnt this and what evidence you have that it is true? If so what manuscripts did he digitally record?

If you can't I can only presume you are either making this up or are repeating rumour.

You quoted Jeevan deol. he lives in the same country where you live. Why do not you ask him?

That will help in shedding some of your ignorance. Do your home work before opening your mouth.

,His most important book ,Sikhs of the Khalsa, contains all the rehatnamas. I think it is in print yet.

Edited July 24, 2009 by singh2

[dalsingh101]

That is not the only one. he found tankahnama of Bhai nand lal ji also dating to 1718 in the library. These manuscripts are still avaliable.

Jeevan Deol only and only quotes Mcleod on rehatnamas. Please do not fabricated admin cut and bull stories. If you have his new finding done by Jeevan Deol please share with us.

If there ever was evidence that you do not know what you are talking about:

The earliest extant rahit nama manuscript appears to be a copy of Nasihat nama, one of the three attributed to Nand Lal. This copy is one of several works, together bearing the date S. 1775 (1718-19 CE), which Jeevan Deol reports having discovered in the library of Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar, where it is numbered MS. 770 (Deol, 2001)

McLeod - Sikhs of the Khalsa. A history of Khalsa rehat.

Please do not fabricated admin cut and bull stories.

I'll leave that to you.

It is completely unbecoming of a sikh to call Chaupa singh a Brahmin. Chaupa singh's rehatnama was the major document in rehatnamas.

He also met martyrdom in sikh struggle of that era. Do not you know that? From where you read your history?

Anyone who has read what I post will know I am very interested in manuscripts. I respect the Chaupa Singh rahit nama for the insight it can provide on the past. But here are some quotes from it from the translation by McLeod.

Sikh marriages should be performed by Brahmans. Brahman SIkhs should receive double the deference and attention normally bestowed on a Sikh.

A Gursikh should never trust a women, neither his own or anothers. Regard them as the embodiment of deceit.

McLeod also adds:

The [goddess] Devi receives abundant attention in Chaupa Singh's rahit nama. It comes it comes in the lengthy narrative description of the successful fire ceremony held on the hill called Naina Devi [pg. 205-35]. The author here is trying to say Guru Gobind Singh worshipped or appealed to Durga (not Akal Purakh) to help form the Khalsa.

That will help in shedding some of your ignorance. Do your home work before opening your mouth.

Advice you REALLY need to follow yourself. But if you haven't learnt by now.....I doubt you ever will.

[dalsingh101]

Plus, get the evidence for McLeod's apparent digitising of manuscripts please. Or is that more "c0ck and bull" as you put it?

(Not withstanding that the technology for this was not easily available when McLeod was researching at the library prior to the 1987 publication).

Please answer that.

[singh2]

It is essential that things are put in proper perspectives.

There was rehatnama of Bhai chaupa singh in sikh reference library.The library was destroyed in 1984.

Mcleod had made a copy of that rehatnama before that and lodged with Guru Nanak Dev university.Contrary what

dalsingh101 states manuscript is still there.

dalsingh101 plays a double role . First he says that manuscript is lost and nothing is there. then he says that Chaupa singh

is a brahmin and his rehatnama is not be trusted. That is an agenda he is wroking for.

Bhai Nand lal wrote tankah nama and most probably it refers to pre khalsa period. I have acopy of this

with me.I will check it and post the contents.

We can discuss contents of chaupa singh rehatnama separately. To call a Sikh who has scarificed his life for sikh

panth is very unbecoming of a sikh.

Like these many sikh granths have one or the thing that goes against Guru sahib's teachings. that does not mean that whole text is

anti gurmat.

Edited July 24, 2009 by singh2

[singh2]

Plus, get the evidence for McLeod's apparent digitising of manuscripts please. Or is that more "c0ck and bull" as you put it?

(Not withstanding that the technology for this was not easily available when McLeod was researching at the library prior to the 1987 publication).

Please answer that.

When i said digitizing i meant copies being made. See the following and get over conspiracy theories.

had he any conspiracy he would not have deposited those copies with Guru Nanak dev university.

http://www.tapoban.org/phorum/read.php?f=1...415&t=20415

The Manuscripts

W H McLeod was able to trace only four copies of the rahitnama. He believes that because of the long-standing doubts attached to the text's credentials, not many manuscripts from the 18th century now survive.

1. Sikh Reference Library (SRL) Text

Until 1984 the Sikh Reference Library in Amritsar had a manuscript (Catalogue No. 6124). The Library was, however, destroyed during the Blue Star attack on the Golden Temple Complex, and thus the manuscript was lost. This was the only surviving copy of the 18th century manuscript. However, Dr McLeod had made a copy of it and lodged it with the Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar.

2. The Khalsa College Text

Held in the Sikh Reference Department of the Khalsa College Amritsar, it is a modern transcription of the combined Chaupa Singh / Nand Lal text (Manuscript no. SHR 277). It was copied from a manuscript held by Gurdwara Damdama Sahib, Talwandi Sabo. In text it follows the Sikh Reference Library manuscript so closely that it could be its direct copy. The minor inconsistencies that exist could be expected from an inexperienced copyist.

[singh2]

Sikh marriages should be performed by Brahmans. Brahman SIkhs should receive double the deference and attention normally bestowed on a Sikh.

A Gursikh should never trust a women, neither his own or anothers. Regard them as the embodiment of deceit.

McLeod also adds:

The [goddess] Devi receives abundant attention in Chaupa Singh's rahit nama. It comes it comes in the lengthy narrative description of the successful fire ceremony held on the hill called Naina Devi [pg. 205-35]. The author here is trying to say Guru Gobind Singh worshipped or appealed to Durga (not Akal Purakh) to help form the Khalsa.

i have this rehatnama with me. i will check it for the contents you have written above and revert.

Hold your breath till then. It does not mean whatever Mcleod writes about Chaupa singh is given in rehatnama.

Chaupa singh's rehatnama is an important source for corroborating that Dasam granth sahib is composition of tenth master.

It gives date of completion of charitropakhayan and it matches with internal evidence.

many rehatanams including tankah nama of bhai nanad lal ji have differing accounts that deos not mean that these are fakes.

[singh2]

It is essential that things are put in proper perspectives.

There was rehatnama of Bhai chaupa singh in sikh reference library.The library was destroyed in 1984.

Mcleod had made a copy of that rehatnama before that and lodged with Guru Nanak Dev university.Contrary what

dalsingh101 states manuscript is still there.

dalsingh101 plays a double role . First he says that manuscript is lost and nothing is there. then he says that Chaupa singh

is a brahmin and his rehatnama is not be trusted. That is an agenda he is wroking for. A typical kala afghan trait.

Bhai Nand lal wrote tankah nama and most probably it refers to pre khalsa period. I have acopy of this

with me.I will check it and post the contents.

We can discuss contents of chaupa singh rehatnama separately. To call a Sikh who has scarificed his life for sikh

panth is very unbecoming of a sikh.

Like these many sikh granths have one or the thing that goes against Guru sahib's teachings. that does not mean that whole text is

anti gurmat.

Edited July 24, 2009 by singh2

[dalsingh101]

Singh2. You are not worth the time. You plainly think you know it all, but your points are flawed to the core. At least have some humility to entertain the notion you may be wrong but I guess your hankar prevents you from doing this. I mean your points about McLeod were totally contradicted by McLeod himself.

Who are you really? Pashaura Singh's cha cha?

It is essential that things are put in proper perspectives.

Yes, and that is that you do not know what you are talking about. And for someone who likes to dictate in debates, such as yourself, that is shameful.

There was rehatnam of Bhai chaupa singh in sikh reference library.The library was destroyed in 1984.

Mcleod had made a copy of that rehatnama before that and lodged with Guru Nanak Dev university.It has a

manuscript no now. So it is not lost as dalsingh states in his post.

Who was saying we never had a copy? I said the original had been destroyed. Stop hiding your ignorance by deflecting to non issues that you invent. Please tell me where you got your information on wholesale digitising of manuscripts by McLeod?

The other early rahit nama of importance is a dated copy the Chaupa Singh rahit nama. A manucript was held by the Sikh reference Library attached to Harmandir Sahib in Amritsar that was copied in Jind City and explicitly dated in its colophon as Chet sudi 14, S. 1821 (1765 CE). This manuscript was destroyed by fore when the Indian Army attacked Darbar Sahib in 1984, but a copy had been made before then and appears as the Gurmuki text in the published version of the rahit nama. (In footnote: I made a copy of the manuscript before it was destroyed and thsi has been published together with an English translation.....A photocopy of this copy is held at the Library of Guru Nanak University at Amritsar. McLeod, 2003

Where does the above suggest he made copies of other manuscripts, let alone digital ones.

We can discuss contents of chaupa singh rehatnama separately. To call a Sikh who has scarificed his life for sikh

panth is very unbecoming of a sikh.

Try reading it. It is he himself who believes he is a 'Brahman Sikh'. No one else has subsequently attached the label to him.

Like these many sikh granths have one or the thing that goes against Guru sahib's teachings. that does not mean that whole text is anti gurmat

Who said it was? Again making issues for no reason. Anyway, if he was around today you would be the first to call him a heretic for his belief that Dasmesh Pita worshipped Durga. But when it suits you, heresy is no big deal.

[singh2]

Singh2. You are not worth the time. You plainly think you know it all, but your points are flawed to the core. At least have some humility to entertain the notion you may be wrong but I guess your hankar prevents you from doing this. I mean your points about McLeod were totally contradicted by McLeod himself.

Who are you really? Pashaura Singh's cha cha?

We are here to learn. i never claimed that i know all. may be i learn something from you. But your agenda has been bared to the core . Do not get upset. Face the music for your subtle propaganda.

Who was saying we never had a copy? I said the original had been destroyed. Stop hiding your ignorance by deflecting to non issues that you invent. Please tell me where you got your information on wholesale digitising of manuscripts by McLeod

?

This was the main issue you started with. Read below. This is written by you when i wrote that he made copies of certain manuscripts and gave to SGPC.

written by singh2

n 1984 most of manuscripts were looted and carried away from Sikh refrence library by

GOI. It was Mcleod who had digitized those and given a copy of those to SGPC.

He needs credit for that. Do not you think so.

Reply by dalsingh101

so far I as I am aware the only thing he done of this nature is to publish the Chaupa Singh rahitnama from the library that was sacked. This manuscript was one that was lost so what is in his published work is all that survives of it. Apparently he made a copy of the work in that publication.

unquote

That is obvious you are contradicting my point. One has to be clever with kala afghani chelas as they lie if not caught in time.

Where does the above suggest he made copies of other manuscripts, let alone digital ones.

Its seems you have lost balance of mind. you are posting something i did not post and attributing to me. I had posted the below mentioned item.

Moreover ask a literary man in Guru nanak dev university, he will be able to tell you.

Sikh Reference Library (SRL) Text

Until 1984 the Sikh Reference Library in Amritsar had a manuscript (Catalogue No. 6124). The Library was, however, destroyed during the Blue Star attack on the Golden Temple Complex, and thus the manuscript was lost. This was the only surviving copy of the 18th century manuscript. However, Dr McLeod had made a copy of it and lodged it with the Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar

Try reading it. It is he himself who believes he is a 'Brahman Sikh'. No one else has subsequently attached the label to him.

He was a Brahmin earlier. But he was a sikh after april 1699. You called him brahmin. That shows your kala afghani bent of mind. Create a lie and disgrace the person.

Who said it was? Again making issues for no reason. Anyway, if he was around today you would be the first to call him a heretic for his belief that Dasmesh Pita worshipped Durga. But when it suits you, heresy is no big deal.

Give us refrence for that. You should provide internet links when you post a reference here. Do not hide those under armpit.Do not try to be over clever. Otherwise it is your personal opinion and carries no weight. It is also plagrism to write someone's writing under your name without providing reference.

Edited July 24, 2009 by singh2

[singh2]

dalsingh101 wrote

Anyone who has read what I post will know I am very interested in manuscripts. I respect the Chaupa Singh rahit nama for the insight it can provide on the past. But here are some quotes from it from the translation by McLeod.

Sikh marriages should be performed by Brahmans. Brahman SIkhs should receive double the deference and attention normally bestowed on a Sikh.

A Gursikh should never trust a women, neither his own or anothers. Regard them as the embodiment of deceit.

I have a copy of Chaupa singh rehatnama. Bhai chaupa singh writes

A sikh of guru should should not have company with the below mentioned 8 and he should neitehr take their advice

1) Turk

2) Yogi

3) pag latha

4) sir khutha

5) litia

6) Dhuria

7) tupia

8) Brahmin

Chaupa singh also writes in rehatnama

A sikh should not care for advice of brahma and mohammed. He should only heed to his Guru

A sikh should have matrimonial relationship with sikh only. He should not care about being a khatri, shudra or vaish.

He should only see that other side is sikh.

unquote

In view of these instructions it unlikely that Chaupa singh ever claimed to be superior because of being a brahmin.

. Can dalsingh101 provide us with refrence from where he got information that made him to curse Chaupa singha s a Brahmin

so that we know the exact context.

Edited July 24, 2009 by singh2

[singh2]

I have a copy of Chaupa singh rehatnama. Bhai chaupa singh writes

A sikh of guru should should not have company with the below mentioned 8 and he should neitehr take their advice

1) Turk

2) Yogi

3) pag latha

4) sir khutha

5) litia

6) Dhuria

7) tupia

8) Brahmin

Chaupa singh also writes in rehatnama

A sikh should not care for advice of brahma and mohammed. He should only heed to his Guru

A sikh should have matrimonial relationship with sikh only. He should not care about being a khatri, shudra or vaish.

He should only see that other side is sikh.

unquote

In view of these instructions it unlikely that Chaupa singh ever claimed to be superior because of being a brahmin.

. Can dalsingh101 provide us with refrence from where he got information that made him to curse Chaupa singha s a Brahmin

so that we know the exact context.

He should keep in mind that Bhai mati dass ji, BHai sati dass ji and bhai dyala ji were also brahmins and later they became sikhs.

Once one embraces sikhism he is a sikh.

He is not here to degrade sikh martyrs to fulfil his agenda,

[singh2]

We are here to learn. i never claimed that i know all. may be i learn something from you. But your agenda has been bared to the core . Do not get upset. Face the music for your subtle propaganda.

?

This was the main issue you started with. Read below. This is written by you when i wrote that he made copies of certain manuscripts and gave to SGPC.

written by singh2

n 1984 most of manuscripts were looted and carried away from Sikh refrence library by

GOI. It was Mcleod who had digitized those and given a copy of those to SGPC.

He needs credit for that. Do not you think so.

Reply by dalsingh101

so far I as I am aware the only thing he done of this nature is to publish the Chaupa Singh rahitnama from the library that was sacked. This manuscript was one that was lost so what is in his published work is all that survives of it. Apparently he made a copy of the work in that publication.

unquote

That is obvious you are contradicting my point. One has to be clever with kala afghani chelas as they lie if not caught in time.

Its seems you have lost balance of mind. you are posting something i did not post and attributing to me. I had posted the below mentioned item.

Moreover ask a literary man in Guru nanak dev university, he will be able to tell you.

Sikh Reference Library (SRL) Text

Until 1984 the Sikh Reference Library in Amritsar had a manuscript (Catalogue No. 6124). The Library was, however, destroyed during the Blue Star attack on the Golden Temple Complex, and thus the manuscript was lost. This was the only surviving copy of the 18th century manuscript. However, Dr McLeod had made a copy of it and lodged it with the Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar

He was a Brahmin earlier. But he was a sikh after april 1699. You called him brahmin. That shows your kala afghani bent of mind. Create a lie and disgrace the person.

Give us refrence for that. You should provide internet links when you post a reference here. Do not hide those under armpit.Do not try to be over clever. Otherwise it is your personal opinion and carries no weight. It is also plagrism to write someone's writing under your name without providing reference.

Rehatnama has nothing like that. You also need to note the comment of a singh after that post cursing the poster a kala afghana and IOSS zealot in disguise. That means if he gives one information about preservation of of document he gives ten other misleading accounts. Can you give us refrence from rehtanama itself. Since you are debating here you are supposed to have studies these things. You cann't debate from google knowledge.

By the way i am curious to know are you an observant sikh?

Edited July 24, 2009 by singh2

[singh2]

DOUBLE POST

We are here to learn. i never claimed that i know all. may be i learn something from you. But your agenda has been bared to the core . Do not get upset. Face the music for your subtle propaganda.

?

This was the main issue you started with. Read below. This is written by you when i wrote that he made copies of certain manuscripts and gave to SGPC.

written by singh2

n 1984 most of manuscripts were looted and carried away from Sikh refrence library by

GOI. It was Mcleod who had digitized those and given a copy of those to SGPC.

He needs credit for that. Do not you think so.

Reply by dalsingh101

so far I as I am aware the only thing he done of this nature is to publish the Chaupa Singh rahitnama from the library that was sacked. This manuscript was one that was lost so what is in his published work is all that survives of it. Apparently he made a copy of the work in that publication.

unquote

That is obvious you are contradicting my point. One has to be clever with kala afghani chelas as they lie if not caught in time.

Its seems you have lost balance of mind. you are posting something i did not post and attributing to me. I had posted the below mentioned item.

Moreover ask a literary man in Guru nanak dev university, he will be able to tell you.

Sikh Reference Library (SRL) Text

Until 1984 the Sikh Reference Library in Amritsar had a manuscript (Catalogue No. 6124). The Library was, however, destroyed during the Blue Star attack on the Golden Temple Complex, and thus the manuscript was lost. This was the only surviving copy of the 18th century manuscript. However, Dr McLeod had made a copy of it and lodged it with the Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar

He was a Brahmin earlier. But he was a sikh after april 1699. You called him brahmin. That shows your kala afghani bent of mind. Create a lie and disgrace the person.

Give us refrence for that. You should provide internet links when you post a reference here. Do not hide those under armpit.Do not try to be over clever. Otherwise it is your personal opinion and carries no weight. It is also plagrism to write someone's writing under your name without providing reference.

Rehatnama has nothing like that. You also need to note the comment of a singh after that post cursing the poster a kala afghana and IOSS zealot in disguise. That means if he gives one information about preservation of of document he gives ten other misleading accounts. Can you give us refrence from rehtanama itself. Since you are debating here you are supposed to have studies these things. You cann't debate from google knowledge.

By the way i am curious to know are you an observant sikh?

This post has been edited by singh2: Today, 12:13 AM

Go to the top of the page

Edit Post

Edited July 24, 2009 by singh2

[dalsingh101]

Before we continue please provide some evidence for your assertion that McLeod created digtised copies of manuscripts from the library that was sacked in Amritsar. Something you attribute to him.

I only wish it were true. If it is, believe you me, I would be over the moon with joy.

Yet again you start with your wild accusations of KA chelas etc. I have never read a word of his and frankly I think that issue is one that is important in Canada as very few average Sikhs know of him in the UK. I'm sure he may have a small number of supporters in the UK but they are insignificant, off the radar here.

In the meanwhile, you yourself seem to be a chela of McLeod and his chumchay. Especially Paushara......who, I repeat was hauled up before the Akal Takhat for his blasphemy and admitted to his guilt.

Try and think about doing something more productive than defending the undefendable at this time of your life. You should be at shaant with the world at this stage of your life but instead you rage like a bitter, angry man.

You accuse others of things that you are guilty of yourself.

Edited July 25, 2009 by dalsingh101

[singh2]

Before we continue please provide some evidence for your assertion that McLeod created digtised copies of manuscripts from the library that was sacked in Amritsar. Something you attribute to him.

I only wish it were true. If it is, believe you me, I would be over the moon with joy.

You have seen it from the link provided. Have not you? Do not take the cover of word used in my post.

I wrote that by digitizing means copies. He might have done it by microfilming. If you want to know nitty gritty details

i will get you those after my visit to Amritsar this winter. I will get the no. of manuscripts he helped in.I know this is the only way

to combat kala afghan chelas.Come with exact proof.

You mentioned the name of Jeevan deol? Do not you know who he was. was he not a part of Mcleod team? Please answer that.

Yet again you start with your wild accusations of KA chelas etc. I have never read a word of his and frankly I think that issue is one that is important in Canada as very few average Sikhs know of him in the UK. I'm sure he may have a small number of supporters in the UK but they are insignificant, off the radar here.

There was no difference between Kala afghhana and IOSS. He was partly a creation of IOSS. Now you should know why i said that.

n the meanwhile, you yourself seem to be a chela of McLeod and his chumchay. Especially Paushara......who, I repeat was hauled up before the Akal </div>Takhat for his blasphemy and admitted to his guilt.

I am not a chela of anybody. I am a sikh of Guru sahib. Pashaura singh is a much better sikh than the boozing gang of IOSS

many of whom are not even living a life as per sikh code of conduct . he is an amritdhari sikh If he had committed any mistake like a Gursikh he has atoned

it by appearing before akal takhat. See the conduct of thugs of IOSS who are taking akal takhat to courts.

A time is coming when these thugs will also be shown the door. Sikhs do not forget the nindaks of their Gurus.

I will bring more facts about these heretics to attention of sangat in due course of time.

Try and think about doing something more productive than defending the undefendable at this time of your life. You should be at shaant with the world at this stage of your life but instead you rage like a bitter, angry man

.

Gurbani advises us to keep working till the end . Moreover how do you know my age. another fast one by kala afghana gang.

Now show us what you wrote about Chaupa singh's rehatnama. When you pass a comment on such important document it means you have read it.

But it seems you haven't. Rebut the points i have raised in my post.

You also wrote chaupa singh Brahmin. That is not true. That also shows inbuilt hate for certain communiites. That is not a sikh trait.

I repeat my question again, Are you an observant sikh

Given below is my earlier post. Give your comments

I have a copy of Chaupa singh rehatnama. Bhai chaupa singh writes

A sikh of guru should should not have company with the below mentioned 8 and he should neitehr take their advice

1) Turk

2) Yogi

3) pag latha

4) sir khutha

5) litia

6) Dhuria

7) tupia

8) Brahmin

Chaupa singh also writes in rehatnama

A sikh should not care for advice of brahma and mohammed. He should only heed to his Guru

A sikh should have matrimonial relationship with sikh only. He should not care about being a khatri, shudra or vaish.

He should only see that other side is sikh.

unquote

In view of these instructions it unlikely that Chaupa singh ever claimed to be superior because of being a brahmin.

. Can dalsingh101 provide us with refrence from where he got information that made him to curse Chaupa singha s a Brahmin

so that we know the exact context.

Edited July 25, 2009 by singh2

[tonyhp32]

Let's cut to the chase. Singh2 doesn't know that there is a big difference between digitising a document and making a handwritten copy! Now i wonder given McLoed's proclivity to mischief did it ever enter his head upon learning of the burning of the library that he could amend the only copy in existence to create further mischief? McLeod make a photo copy of his handwritten copy of the Chaupa Singh Rehatnama and gave it to Guru Nanak University. This seems to be the sum total of his 'digitising' the texts subsequently destroyed in the library in 1984. For this Singh2 is prepared to forgive McLeod and lionise his chelay like Peshaura Singh.

McLeod's legacy is not just his own works but the network of chelay like Peshaura Singh, Harjot Oberoi and others who will infect Sikh studies in the west with McLeod's heretical views for generations to come. But to people such as Singh2 that's fine because he 'digitised' the lost texts of 1984!

I am not a chela of anybody. I am a sikh of Guru sahib. Pashaura singh is a much better sikh than the boozing gang of IOSS

many of whom are not even living a life as per sikh code of conduct . he is an amritdhari sikh If he had committed any mistake like a Gursikh he has atoned

it by appearing before akal takhat. See the conduct of thugs of IOSS who are taking akal takhat to courts.

If you are a Sikh of Guru Sahib then how do you rationalise supporting Peshaura Singh the chela of McLeod who stated that the Mool Mantar was not given by Guru Nanak but was subsequently developed and given a final shape by Guru Arjan Dev?

Edited July 25, 2009 by tonyhp32

[singh2]

Let's cut to the chase. Singh2 doesn't know that there is a big difference between digitising a document and making a handwritten copy! Now i wonder given McLoed's proclivity to mischief did it ever enter his head upon learning of the burning of the library that he could amend the only copy in existence to create further mischief? McLeod make a photo copy of his handwritten copy of the Chaupa Singh Rehatnama and gave it to Guru Nanak University. This seems to be the sum total of his 'digitising' the texts subsequently destroyed in the library in 1984. For this Singh2 is prepared to forgive McLeod and lionise his chelay like Peshaura Singh.

Microfilming is not handwritten copy. I hope you understand that. Your statement does not hold ground on another account as well as there are other scholars who have written rehatnamas. you need to study those before making a funny statement.

McLeod's legacy is not just his own works but the network of chelay like Peshaura Singh, Harjot Oberoi and others who will infect Sikh studies in the west with McLeod's heretical views for generations to come. But to people such as Singh2 that's fine because he 'digitised' the lost texts of 1984!

Whatever Mcleod's distortions are there you need to put here for us to see. Just making statements does no good.

Whatever their drawbacks but certainly they are of less gravity than the blasphemy of kala afghana who was a product

of so called IOSS, supported by the thugs of IOSS. you ahve shown your supprt for him in this thread.

If you are a Sikh of Guru Sahib then how do you rationalise supporting Peshaura Singh the chela of McLeod who stated that the Mool Mantar was not given by Guru Nanak but was subsequently developed and given a final shape by Guru Arjan Dev?

Give the refrence here. I am not here to defend him for his mistakes.Otherwise it is your personal statement and i do not believe what supporters of kala afghana a convicted thief and molester say.

By the way do you know the blasphemic comment of an IOSS man on Mata Ganga ji. I will post it in a few days for you to see for yourself.I am gathering that now.

We will not let balsphemic people go unanswered.

Meanwhile read the link below to know how an IOSS kingpin who spearheads vilification compaign against others and dasam granth resort to lies. His website on Dasam granth is a bunch of distortions and lies.

http://www.patshahi10.org/index.php?option...h&Itemid=63

Edited July 25, 2009 by singh2

[tonyhp32]

Singh2

In a debate one would assume that both persons would be aware of issues but in this case you do not have a clue about McLeod or Peshaura Singh. You claimed

I do not agree with many of Mcleaod' observations on sikh history but he did a lot in identifying and digitizing

many manuscripts of our religion of which our so called scholars were unaware. He handed over the list

to SGPC. This was done by him before 1984.

In the video on another thread he states that he made a handwritten copy of the Chaupa Singh Rehatnama and then he gave a photocopy of his handwritten copy to Guru Nanak Dev University. They might have microfilmed or microfiched this copy. But nowhere does he claim that he digitised manuscripts. I think you came up with this statement solely to defend your views on Mcleod

Incompetent and faithless sikh scholars of the types of Gurtej singh, Jasbir singh mann, Jagjit singh , daljit singh

of IOSS considered it an attack on their hold of sikhism. They created a vicious atmosphere and lobbied with Akal

takhat to penalize an old Gursikh Piar singh and pashaura singh on filmsy grounds and got them excommunicated.

Get off you high horse! Peshaura Singh agreed in 1994 at Akal Takht that his findings in his thesis were flawed but when he got back to the West he regurgitated the same bukwas in his following books. His favourite line of thought is that Guru Arjan Dev worked on a number of drafts of the Guru Granth Sahib and each and every manuscript he comes across which are from Mina sources he immediately ascribes to be 'an early draft of the Guru Granth Sahib'!

Give the refrence here. I am not here to defend him for his mistakes.Otherwise it is your personal statement and i do not believe what supporters of kala afghana a convicted thief and molester say.

If you are unaware of what Peshaura Singh has written then STOP trying to make him into some great scholar. What kind of fool takes a view on a controversial person like PS and yet knows next to nothing about his views!

My suggestion to you is to stop writing pointless and ignorant posts on this thread, go away and do some research and come back in a few days after you know exactly what the issues are concerning Mcleod and Peshaura Singh.

Btw stop trying to imply that I support Kala afghana. I don't.

Edited July 26, 2009 by tonyhp32

[singh2]

Singh2

In a debate one would assume that both persons would be aware of issues but in this case you do not have a clue about McLeod or Peshaura Singh. You claimed

If you think it is so then you should give the references here. Why are not you posting those inspite of repeated requests.

In the video on another thread he states that he made a handwritten copy of the Chaupa Singh Rehatnama and then he gave a photocopy of his handwritten copy to Guru Nanak Dev University. They might have microfilmed or microfiched this copy. But nowhere does he claim that he digitised manuscripts. I think you came up with this statement solely to defend your views on Mcleod

You should have refrenced that video here. Do not assume that i have seen that.

Your above statement is flawed. What is meant by handwritten copy? Please elaborate on that.

Moreover your earlier notion that he might have played mischief with the contents of rehtanama is completely

fabrication, a typical trait of kala afghana chelas. When pointed out that there were earlier writings of rehtanamas as well and manipulation

is not [possible you are changing your tune.

Read what you wrote

written by Tony

Now i wonder given McLoed's proclivity to mischief did it ever enter his head upon learning of the burning of the library that he could amend the only copy in existence to create further mischief? McLeod make a photo copy of his handwritten copy of the Chaupa Singh Rehatnama and gave it to Guru Nanak University. This seems to be the sum total of his 'digitising' the texts subsequently destroyed in the library in 1984. For this Singh2 is prepared to forgive McLeod and lionise his chelay like Peshaura Singh.

Get off you high horse! Peshaura Singh agreed in 1994 at Akal Takht that his findings in his thesis were flawed but when he got back to the West he regurgitated the same bukwas in his following books. His favourite line of thought is that Guru Arjan Dev worked on a number of drafts of the Guru Granth Sahib and each and every manuscript he comes across which are from Mina sources he immediately ascribes to be 'an early draft of the Guru Granth Sahib'!

Give the refrence here. Why are you holding those back.

If he did that he got punishment. What about thugs of kala afghana gang. They are continuing

their blasphemy and show their eyes to akal takhat.

My suggestion to you is to stop writing pointless and ignorant posts on this thread, go away and do some research and come back in a few days after you know exactly what the issues are concerning Mcleod and Peshaura Singh.

You should stop your propaganda in this thread. It seems that is the only thing you people are trainedin. Why do not you put the objectionable part here and show others. Start with Mcleod first. Do not keep that under your armpits.

Btw stop trying to imply that I support Kala afghana. I don't.

Since kala afghana has been exposed in the recent past, his chelas have strted saying that they do not follow him.

Tony you are just like them

See how you defend him

Post of tony in this thread about kala afghana

So if someone is a convicted thief or molester then it means he has lost his academic acumen and his views cannot be trusted!

unquote

What acdemic acumen an 8th grade kala afghana who started as constable in police and served his whole life

there without writing a single paper on anything can have.Please tell us. He wrote nonsense about Dasam grannth sahib

and committed worst type of blasphemy. Do not you think it is more damaging than Mcleod. Why ignoring those thugs

and even showing love for them? That means you do not consider Dasam granth important for sikhs.That shows agenda

of you guys.

Edited July 26, 2009 by singh2

[singh2]

Tony writes

If you are a Sikh of Guru Sahib then how do you rationalise supporting Peshaura Singh the chela of McLeod who stated that the Mool Mantar was not given by Guru Nanak but was subsequently developed and given a final shape by Guru Arjan Dev?

Please confirm if i am correct to understand the above as it is a gol mol ( round about ) statement and kala afghanis are very

adept in backtracking later.

You seem to say above that Pashaura singh wrote that mool mantar was not a gift from Guru nanak Dev ji. It was written by

Guru Arjan Dev ji.

Do you stick to your view as above.

Edited July 27, 2009 by singh2

[singh2]

kala afghani fauj did not participate in this thread on the pretext that he is very busy.

But he is busy in sending private messages. The following i received today.One can gauge the knowledge

he has gained by reading SGGS ji.

QUOTE

PM rceived from fauj

Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh

Inder singh devta ji,

Song below gives us more education than chariters in less than 4 minutes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwfZULp2VY0

Should we write Pt. 10 and promote in gurduaras?

Mahakaal Di Motor Tay Kach Di Glaasi Kharkay

Mahakaal loves booze and weed so a song dedicated to Mahakaal.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-XJ3ijoYlwo

To Administrator

Please do not take this out. it stands as a testimony to the mindset of kala afghani/Darsahn ragi /IOSS

clique. Like sect head like followers.

[tonyhp32]

And they are angered even more by the conclusions Pashaura Singh has made from comparing the two texts: That Guru Arjan changed the words of the previous Gurus, even the Mool Mantar, to fit either a poetic style or the musical style of a raag, Pashaura Singh said. But the meaning was still intact.

“Guru Arjan had every right to refine the words,” Pashaura Singh said. “He was the fifth Nanak.”

His critics said Guru Arjan had so much reverence for all the Gurus that he made every attempt to be exact with every word of their original dhur-ki-bani. Pashaura Singh is trying to reduce Guru Arjan to a common poet who edits and edits his work until he has made the words musical, they said.

Read the whole list of Peshaura Singh's so-called research.

http://www.sikhnn.com/print.php?sid=619

[singh2]

Read the whole list of Peshaura Singh's so-called research.

http://www.sikhnn.com/print.php?sid=619

This was a show arranged by Jasbir Mann most probably last year. People with dubious credentials are prone to

act like that. He himself has no credentials and is a master manipulator who feeds wrong and mischievous information

on Dasam granth sahib on his website.Let us leave this for the time being.

Let us go to the original topic. You claim to know the grave charges against pashaura singh

I put the following for your perusal. Will you please confirm what you write

QUOTE by toni

If you are a Sikh of Guru Sahib then how do you rationalise supporting Peshaura Singh the chela of McLeod who stated that the Mool Mantar was not given by Guru Nanak but was subsequently developed and given a final shape by Guru Arjan Dev?

Singh2 writes to Tony

Please confirm if i am correct to understand the above as it is a gol mol ( round about ) statement and kala afghanis are very

adept in backtracking later.

You seem to say above that Pashaura singh wrote that mool mantar was not a gift from Guru nanak Dev ji. It was written by

Guru Arjan Dev ji.

Do you stick to your view as above.

Edited July 27, 2009 by singh2

[singh2]

This was a good one. Let us give the devil his due

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/learning-zone/message/72220

Once I arranged a dinner reception for him in Delhi; he was there to release his book "Sikhs

of the Khalsa: A History of the Khalsa Rahit". Of course before he

left this world he translated and scrutinized all of the major Rahat

Naamas, a task none of us could even dare to undertake. Sardar Khushwant

Singh who released his book expressed the same opinion.